this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
213 points (81.8% liked)
Linus Tech Tips
3804 readers
1 users here now
~~⚠️ De-clickbait-ify the youtube titles or your post will be removed!~~
~~Floatplane titles are perfectly fine.~~
~~LTT/LMG community. Brought to you by ******... Actually, no, not this time. This time it's brought to you by Lemmy, the open communities and free and open source software!~~
~~If you post videos from Youtube/LTT, please please un-clickbait the titles. (You can use the title from https://nitter.net/LTTtranslator/ but it doesn't seem to have been updated in quite some while...)~~
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A lot better of a response, but I think Linus missed the point on toxic workplace/culture comments.
I'm sure they're not able to comment on Madison (for good legal reason and they still need the third party firm to investigate), but Linus' response just felt more "look at all the nice things LMG does" rather than a commitment about the long-term cultural issues. Anonymous employee surveys are really difficult to trust because a) they have a reputation of not being anonymous and b) if the culture has someone already scared to be open, it's doubtful that there will be honest answers. It sounds like LMG did take their one-on-one meetings seriously, but time will only tell.
(Personal ancedote: I have had managers watch me fill out those anonymous surveys to make sure it was "filled out properly.")
Yeah, it's nice LMG gives decent Christmas bonuses and hold have all those off-hours events, but I can't help but feel it's designed more to keep employees trapped in the LMG bubble and when you feel trapped, it's harder to push back and up for yourself.
I don't want Linus/LTT to fail. Mistakes are bound to happen and I enjoy watching a tiny Canadian man put things down really fast. I honestly just don't want to support a complete jerk that purposefully hurts other people and refuses to take accountability. If it comes out that everything with Madison is true and LMG takes no corrective action, I will have no issue hard blocking LMG content.
EDIT: Further thoughts after reading the responses:
It's really none of our business what happened between Madison and LMG. The only thing that matters is hoping Madison has a good support system in place and LMG makes the necessary internal changes in response to the third-party investigation.
I don't think it's wrong that they shared their turnover numbers, but I don't think it's representative of the big picture. LMG's roles feel more specialist in nature. I don't imagine there's a high amount of jobs in some areas that LMG offers, which means people are less likely to leave. It's also possible that some parts of the company are shielded from what happens elsewhere. (It appears both Creator Warehouse and Floatplane weren't as impacted)
It's good to at least some companies take anonymous surveys / one-on-one feedback seriously. Rewatching the video, it appears they are taking one-on-one feedback seriously, which I hope is the case.
Although I don't disagree, publicly announcing turnover stats that are far below average kinda blows a giant hole in the "LMG is a toxic hellhole" narrative. I've been in toxic hellholes, and turnover tells the real story.
This also doesn't negate necessarily Madison's statements and there probably have been real issues, but I think this is the part of the video where he said (paraphrased) "don't panic about a rise in intentional turnover." I lead a team about LMG's size, and people often don't realize that you can say and demonstrate your values consistently at this size, and still have someone fuck it up because some people just come to the org with the wrong learned behavior and it's gargantuan to re-program them to a healthy state, and a smaller few are just unsalvageable assholes. See also, the Stanford Prison experiment. It would extremely not blow my mind to learn that a few people or a particular team in LMG are entirely toxic and it was missed, and also that the experience for the vast majority doesn't match with this and they're trying to run an ethical company. My (optimistic) assumption is that the intentional turnover comment is probably going to focus on those that Madison dealt with.
If I had to guess, I'd say the turnover stats only count full employees, and are therefore a reflection of their "trial period" hiring policy more than anything else. They avoid needing to officially "fire" people they don't like, and anyone who isn't comfortable with the culture can leave without needing to "resign".
On top of that, LTT holds "dream job" status in many people's minds, so a lower-than-average turnover is expected, and it's impossible to distinguish that effect from the working conditions.
I'm not saying it's necessarily a bad place to work, I'm just saying the stats they gave are inconclusive.
If they were deliberately manipulating the stats, that would come out quickly with the level of scrutiny they're facing right now. Also, wholeheartedly agree with a trial period. They're good for the company obviously for lots of reasons, but a less obvious one is rooting out cultural fits and problem people like this. Also, I think this is better for the employee as well - it's much better for mental health to have a clean break than it is to spend the next 6 months going through "performance improvement plans" and such.
Never said the trial period was bad, nor that they were "manipulating" the figures per se (including temp employees in the stats wouldn't make sense at all). It just makes comparing against the national average a little silly.
Agreed, I thought mentioning those statistics was a tasteful way of addressing that conversation as best as possible in a YouTube video, and those "people will be fired" comments felt like a clear commitment to rooting out and going as far as firing anyone creating that kind of environment.
The amount of "Linus didn't even talk about" in this thread is crazy to me, just feels like bad reading comprehension when he directly addressed most of the conversation (HR, work hours and environment, etc) and even committed to firing people in a video his staff will all be watching.
Indeed. It feels like quite a lot of commenters watched a different video.
Workers Union could solve it
I guess its not just anonymous surveys though is it, its that, plus a low turnover, plus 1-1 feedback sessions and other things I'm probably forgetting. But don't overlook the conclusion where if you read between the lines, more personnel changes are likely as a result of this.
I think your last point is highly unlikely, there is too much light on this for the issues alleged by Madison to be true, and for LMG to do nothing. But the tricky thing is that the full truth about Madison's issues is unlikely to be made public, and equally the full action taken by LMG will not be made public. HR, and employment issues kinda require privacy - this isn't a government or public department, its a private company with responsibilities to employees past & present mandated by law.
Agreed on your point regarding Madison/LMG - it really isn't our business to begin with and the best to hope for is that everyone involved is able to resolve it privately.
I've always viewed off-hours events as a sort of shitty way to show you're a "fun company" (tm). For workers who are already expected to put in well above 40 hours per week in a stressful environment asking them to cut further into their free time for work events really isn't very helpful. It's just one more obligation to the company that you are now being pressured to fulfill
IMHO, there's anything wrong with the occasional one-off optional event, like a bowling night or picnic. That said, I've always felt like events are more of a risk/liability/personality assessment - if my manager doesn't think I'm a fun activity buddy, does that mean I'm screwed?
My company has those surveys. As far as I know they are anonymous but the problem is any feedback falls on your direct supervisor to fix. The first year they did it a lot of us were honest about it and our boss got absolutely wrecked over it even though he had very little control over the organizational problems we were complaining about so the next one we always just based it off things he had a say in which he's a good boss so the surveys no longer aligned with the company as a whole.
A third issue with anonymous surveys is that barely anyone fills them in. Only a certain type of personality likes these things.